Wednesday, November 15, 2006

Is This "Careful Consideration?"

Here is an example of a "poor church" receiving a captioning exemption on the basis of a very skimpy letter with no supporting documentation. All the pastor did was say that he could not afford it and that all contributions went to pay for air time.

Maybe this is a dumb question, but if the congregation knows that all their donations are going to pay for air time, why couldn't the "poor churches" tellt heir congregations the truth about the need to closed caption the programs that they are paying for? That would justify asking their congregations to increase their donations.

3 comments:

MikeSZZZ said...

This is truly ignorance toward deaf people. All this church did to qualify was to include "undue hardship" in their letter and suddenly they became credible without proving anything. Now I see why many many people that can walk, park at handicapped spaces with such tags.

Jamie said...

I am sorry, but I have to object to your comment about disabled people parking at handicapped spaces. Many people who park at handicapped spaces may not look disabled to the eye, but they do have a disability. If you want to be sure they are disabled, look in their cars to see if they are displaying a handicapped tag.

MikeSZZZ said...

Of course, that's the deception. There was a tv special on this abuse of tags I've seen years ago. They're easily obtained. Point is, abuse of system when it comes to disability access.